Tunisia, Egypt, Morocco and Libya crisis: Benghazi

[American Patriot]

Secret Cable Revelation Blows Open Benghazi Cover-Up Story

Helle Dale
November 1, 2012 at 2:57 pm
(2)
Tweet


The revelation of a classified cable dated August 15 from Ambassador Christopher Stevens to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton describing in detail the security threats to the U.S. Benghazi consulate is a quantum leap forward in the reporting on the attack that left the ambassador and three security personnel dead.
We have Fox News’s Catherine Herridge to thank for reporting yesterday on the existence of the classified cable. Mainstream media coverage of Benghazi has been scandalously negligent. Indeed, David Ignatius, one of The Washington Post’s top columnists, is now citing Fox News for its breaking stories on Benghazi. This has clearly not been sitting well with the editors of the Post’s op-ed section, who initially chose to run Ignatius’s column, “Lingering Questions About Benghazi,” dated October 30, on its website only. Criticized roundly on talk radio and social media, the Post ran it in its print edition two days later.
The August 15 cable, marked “secret,” was sent by the Benghazi mission and outlined both the threats and the insufficiencies to U.S. security in Libya. The mission called for an “emergency meeting” to discuss the rapidly eroding situation on the ground:

RSO (Regional Security Officer) expressed concerns with the ability to defend Post in the event of a coordinated attack due to limited manpower, security measures, weapons capabilities, host nation support, and the overall size of the compound.

The cable repeatedly describes the situation in Benghazi as “trending negatively” because “the Benghazi militias have become more brazen in their actions and have little fear of reprisal” from the government of Libya.
“In light of the uncertain security environment, US Mission Benghazi will submit specific requests to US Embassy Tripoli for additional physical security upgrades and staffing needs by separate cover.” The cable went on to include “the location of approximately ten Islamist militias and AQ training camps within Benghazi.… [T]hese groups ran the spectrum from Islamist militias, such as the QRF Brigade and Ansar al-Sharia, to ‘Takfirist thugs.’”
The revelation of the cable follows the report on Friday by Fox’s Jennifer Griffin that CIA officers in Benghazi had been ordered to “stand down” when they wanted to help repel the attack on the consulate about a mile away. Fox also reported that the CIA officers at the annex had asked for military support when the annex came under fire later, but they had also been turned down.
Questions on what happened before, during, and after the Benghazi attack continue to pile up, and just a few media outlets seem to be looking for real answers.

[American Patriot]

Fred Thompson Calls Benghazi 'Biggest Cover-Up in American History'

By Robert Stacy McCain on 11.1.12 @ 7:35PM

BLUE ASH, Ohio – Former Sen. Fred Thompson today said he was “totally disgusted” by the Obama administration’s handling of the Libya terrorist attack, saying that U.S. officials failed to act “while our people were being systematically slaughtered” at the Benghazi consulate.
Speaking at an event sponsored by the free-market group Americans for Prosperity, the former Republican senator from Tennessee invoked his experience nearly 40 years ago as a Watergate investigator, saying that Congress must “get to the bottom of” the administration’s failures in the Sept. 11 incident that left Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans dead in Libya.
“This is probably the biggest cover-up in American history – and you’re talking to an expert in cover-ups,” Thompson said.
“There are three scandals here – before, during and after,” Thompson told about 40 people gathered for the AFP event at the Mariner's Inn in the Cincinnati suburb of West Chester. Citing the numerous incidents and warnings leading up to the assault on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi on the 11th anniversary of the 2001 terrorist attacks, Thompson mockingly asked, “What was your first hint that there might be trouble in Libya?”
Thompson commented on reports that administration officials refused to approve U.S. air strikes to defend the embattled Benghazi compound because of concerns about civilian casualties.
“You’re outside our embassy while it’s being attacked? Fair game, buddy,” said Thompson, who unsuccessfully sought the GOP presidential nomination in 2008. With the latest news from CBS that the administration did not convene its Counterterrorism Security Group during the Libyan crisis, he said the scandal was “playing out as we speak.”
Thompson, who as an actor starred in film hits like the Hunt for Red October and on TV in Law & Order, said that the terrorists would have scattered “with just one shot” from the C-130 gunship that the U.S. had overhead during the Benghazi attack. “Apparently, we’re not even willing to defend our own ambassador.”

[American Patriot]

Liberal national media covers up truth about Benghazi

Letter to the editor






November 01, 2012 12:00 am • By Becky Buckmaster

For several days now, I have been looking for an IR story of Washington’s disgraceful cover-up of the killing of Americans in Benghazi and have found nothing.
I cannot believe the lack of information coming to the public on behalf of liberal journalism. If the president were a Republican, the papers would be crucifying him, on a daily basis; yet we hear nothing from Lee Newspapers.
Washington is withholding the truth about their failure to respond to calls for help in Libya until after the elections. This lack of information supplied to everyone is a dishonor to the brave Americans that died and to the United States.
Becky Buckmaster
East Helena

[American Patriot]

Gingrich: The White House is playing games with us

Published October 31, 2012 | Hannity | Sean Hannity
Special Guests: Newt Gingrich, former presidential candidate



This is a rush transcript from "Hannity," October 31, 2012. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
SEAN HANNITY, HOST OF "HANNITY": Welcome back to "Hannity"; Now in a moment, I will be joined by former speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich, who says that he may have information on secret White House e-mails about the Benghazi cover-up.
But first the administration in a desperate attempt to make Obama appear presidential released a photo of him in the situation room during Hurricane Sandy.
Now you may recall they did the very same thing in the aftermath of the raid that got Usama bin Laden. But here's my question, where is the picture of the president sitting in the situation room during the Benghazi terror attack.
Now you want to know why the White House has not released that photo. Well, probably because it looks like this, empty, they don't want us to know what the president was up to as this assault was taking place. In other words, like everything else, they've been trying to cover it up.
Because as we now know the night of the attack, the president was not focused on Libya, he was getting ready for this, a campaign trip to good old Las Vegas instead of staying in Washington and getting to the bottom of the terrorist attack.
And we are also learning tonight courtesy of our own Catherine Herridge that according to our classified cable reviewed by Fox News, the U.S. mission in Benghazi warned the State Department back in mid-August less than a month before the assault that killed Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans that Al Qaeda had training camps in Benghazi and the consulate could not defend against a coordinated attack.
Joining me now with reaction, former speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich. So let's see they spiked the football again and again with bin Laden. They are out there, photo op galore today as the president goes out there with Hurricane Sandy. I'm fine with it.
But where is the picture of the situation room when they had literally real-time video of our consulate being attacked and Americans being murdered? Where is that video?
NEWT GINGRICH (R), FORMER SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: Well, this whole thing gets stranger and stranger. You know, we're not asking what was Al Qaeda doing, we're not asking what the various gangs in Benghazi doing. We're asking about the American government what it was doing.
Now you would think they have pretty good records about where the president was, where the national security advisor was, where the secretary of defense was, where the chairman of the Joint Chiefs was.
I mean, none of these things ought to be very hard to put together. And yet seven weeks after Americans were murdered in Benghazi we cannot get the truth out this administration.
Their answer today to the suggestion, which I’d been given by a United States senator that there may will be some e-mails from the security advisors office that closed down an effort to help. Their answer was very narrowly worded.
HANNITY: I have it. I can put it up on the screen as long as you're talking about it and what it specifically says. Neither the president nor anyone in the White House denied any request for assistance in Benghazi during the attack.
GINGRICH: Right. Now first of all, clearly people in Benghazi asking for assistance so what does that mean? Does it mean it was cut of somewhere? That the president although he is commander in chief did not know that they were asking for assistance?
It's very clear if you look at the reports we now have that the SEALs, the former SEALs who stayed to defend the ambassador and defend consulate, they fought until they were killed at 4:00 in the morning that there was going to be C-130 gunship overhead.
Because they were using a laser designator to target the mortars and they apparently thought there was going to be an airplane overhead to take out those mortars. So they thought help was on the way.
And in fact, from Tripoli -- it’s almost -- I don’t know what the right word. It is so sad, Sean. The people in Tripoli on their own put together six American contractors, 16 Libyan contractors, they fly in to Benghazi trying desperately to bring help.
Meanwhile, right across the Mediterranean, there is a Marine combat unit. There are C-130s. There are F-18 fighter airplanes. A little further to the east, in Turkey, there is fighter aircraft available. None of this is mobilized.
And the White House is playing games with us. Who was in charge? Who did the president say should take care of this? Did they want to in fact rescue the ambassador and the people who were being killed with him? Why wasn't anything done for seven hours.
I mean, we now have seven weeks of refusal to explain seven hours. I find it very mystifying.
HANNITY: Well, there are three aspects to this from my perspective, before during and after the ambassador requested extra security. He was denied. They reduced the force at one point so who made that decision?
Then it's during this entire episode, we know that according to Charlene Lamb, our government, our State Department was watching this in real-time. Where was president? The intelligence community knew within hours this was a terror attack.
We have audio that actually caused a Navy SEAL, Ty Woods, to disobey an order to stand down, risk his military career and his life and gave his life seven hours later fighting. He did rescue people.
So during this whole thing, they're all requesting, there is an audiotape of the consulate begging for help that caused this Navy SEAL to act after being told to stand down. Now, apparently these tapes exist according to my sources. Does the White House have an obligation to release them?
GINGRICH: Look, I think the president owes every American on Friday or Saturday at the latest a press conference where they lay out their case. Tell us the truth. They -- we're not asking you to say everything worked perfectly.
We're not going to blame you if some things that were terrible happened, but the American people deserve to know the truth. You may remember that in testimony, the man who was in charge of security in the region actually said at one point speaking at a congressional hearing that he felt Al Qaeda was in the building, meaning the State Department.
He felt that his enemies -- he had greater problems getting help out of the State Department that he felt like he had a threat from Al Qaeda. He could not get the people -- he cited one phone conversation that must have been horrific where he and this guy were arguing about whether or not Americans ought to be protected. The guy said to him don't even make the request. It's not going to be honored. That by the way on the record by somebody who is employed by the U.S. government.
HANNITY: What did the president know? When did he know it? Did he leave to Vegas on that night of knowing that the country had just been a victim of a terror attack considering this is American -- considered American sovereignty here?
All right, we got to take a break. We will talk more with Newt Gingrich right after this.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/hannit...#ixzz2B4XMP9Lu

[American Patriot]

By Jake Tapper
@jaketapper



Nov 1, 2012 4:29pm

The Benghazi Drip-Drip-Drip


As he left his Marine One helicopter Wednesday evening and walked to the residence of the White House, President Obama did not respond to a question shouted out by ABC News’s Mary Bruce about when he would begin to provide answers to the numerous questions building up about what exactly what went wrong in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11, 2012.


The president smiled and continued walking.


Perhaps he couldn’t hear the question over the din of the chopper’s blades, but either way the smile and wave – almost Reagan-esque in style – underline the apparent strategy the president specifically and his administration in general have seemed to adopt when it comes to the myriad inquiries about the decisions that led to the deaths of four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens: they are deferring detailed answers to the investigation and – critics say –running out the clock until Election Day.
As of now, the White House has disclosed that President Obama was informed about the attack on the diplomatic outpost in Benghazi at roughly 5pm by his National Security Adviser Tom Donilon as he was in a pre-scheduled meeting with Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey. At that meeting, senior administration officials say, the President ordered that the U.S. begin moving military assets into the region to prepare for a range of contingencies.
But beyond that, the White House has punted, saying the Accountability Review Board established by the State Department is investigating the matter and what went wrong. No detailed tick-tock, no information about the president’s involvement in decision-making. In addition, they’re preparing for a closed-door hearing of the Senate’s Select Committee on Intelligence on November 15.
Without question in this hyper-partisan environment, Republicans operatives are fanning flames and creating suspicions where there’s no evidence of wrongdoing, trafficking in false rumors and idle speculation. The White House has felt the necessity to pop its head up to shoot down stories it says are false.
For instance, Tommy Vietor, the spokesman for the National Security Council, has said that despite some claims, there was no real-time video of the attack being watched in the Situation Room.
As for recent stories suggesting otherwise, Vietor says, “the White House didn’t deny any requests for assistance. Period. Moreover, what the entire government did – the White House, State Department, Intelligence Community, Department of Defense included – was to work to mobilize all available assets and move them into the region as quickly as possible. That’s what the President ordered the Secretary of Defense and Chairman to do the first time he was briefed about these issues. Many of those assets were later used to reinforce embassies in places like Yemen, Libya and Egypt.”
But that doesn’t mean the myriad questions stacking up are all political in nature, nor that those interested in answers about the Benghazi tragedy are motivated by partisan and nefarious aims.
The Washington Post’s respected foreign policy columnist David Ignatius just yesterday posed “Lingering Questions about Benghazi.” One of them, pointedly, was “At a time when al-Qaeda was strengthening its presence in Libya and across North Africa, why didn’t the United States have more military hardware nearby?”
In the place of a detailed description from the Obama administration about what happened more than six weeks ago comes the drip-drip-drip of stories about the failures of the Obama administration to provide those Americans on the ground in Libya with all the security assets they needed.
ABC News broke some stories on this, ranging from a security team being denied continued use of an airplane its commander wanted to keep in country to better do his job; to the security team leaving Libya before Ambassador Stevens wanted it to.
Fox News Channel’s Catherine Herridge last night reported on a newly discovered cable indicating that in August, less than a month before the attack, the diplomatic post in Benghazi convened an “emergency meeting” concerned about local Al Qaeda training camps. Said the cable: “RSO (Regional Security Officer) expressed concerns with the ability to defend Post in the event of a coordinated attack due to limited manpower, security measures, weapons capabilities, host nation support, and the overall size of the compound.”
The cable stated that “In light of the uncertain security environment, US Mission Benghazi will submit specific requests to US Embassy Tripoli for additional physical security upgrades and staffing needs by separate cover.”
The State Department’s comment to Fox: “An independent board is conducting a thorough review of the assault on our post in Benghazi. Once we have the board’s comprehensive account of what happened, findings and recommendations, we can fully address these matters.”
It was the exact same statement given to ABC News earlier in the month about a different revelation.
This afternoon, journalists Harald Doornbos and Jenan Moussa in Foreign Policy Magazine reported that when they arrived at the compound in Benghazi on October 26 they found “several ash-strewn documents beneath rubble in the looted Tactical Operations Center, one of the four main buildings of the partially destroyed compound. Some of the documents — such as an email from Stevens to his political officer in Benghazi and a flight itinerary sent to Sean Smith, a U.S. diplomat slain in the attack — are clearly marked as State Department correspondence. Others are unsigned printouts of messages to local and national Libyan authorities. The two unsigned draft letters are both dated Sept. 11 and express strong fears about the security situation at the compound on what would turn out to be a tragic day. They also indicate that Stevens and his team had officially requested additional security at the Benghazi compound for his visit — and that they apparently did not feel it was being provided.”
A Sept. 11 missive to the head of the Libyan Ministry of Foreign Affairs notes that on that morning, “one of our diligent guards made a troubling report. Near our main gate, a member of the police force was seen in the upper level of a building across from our compound. It is reported that this person was photographing the inside of the U.S. special mission and furthermore that this person was part of the police unit sent to protect the mission. The police car stationed where this event occurred was number 322.”
On Air Force One today, White House press secretary Jay Carney was asked by ABC News how closely the President is reading and following the media reports about what went wrong in Benghazi.
“Is he engaged in the investigation and receiving updates on the investigation, or is he waiting until it’s complete?” ABC News’ Devin Dwyer asked.
Carney noted that since the “investigations are being conducted by both the FBI and the Accountability Review Board” the president himself “is not participating in the investigation. He is anticipating results that show us exactly what happened, who was responsible and what lessons we can learn from it in terms of how we ensure that it never happens again.”
The White House press secretary – who has not held a full-fledged briefing with the White House press corps since October 12 – said that the president “expects the investigations to be rigorous. He is extremely focused on making sure that we find exactly what happened and who was responsible, and tracking down those who were responsible and bringing them to justice.”
-Jake Tapper, Mary Bruce, Devin Dwyer and Dana Hughes

[vector7]

Geraldo Rivera melts down over Benghazi

Geraldo Explodes at Co-Host [Eric Boling] Over Libya Story on Fox: 'You Are a Politician Looking to Make a Political Point!' it was one of the most heated arguments in recent memory on the news network. In short, Geraldo continued to trumpet his argument from last week that the U.S. military could not have done anything to save those attacked in Libya. After fill-in host Eric Bolling suggested how disgraceful it was that the government did "nothing" to help the eventual victims, Geraldo wasn't having any of it.

Geraldo Absolutely Explodes at Co-Host Over Libya Story on Fox: ‘You Are a Politician Looking to Make a Political Point!’

• Posted on November 2, 2012 at 8:41am by Jonathon M. Seidl

• Comments (765)

“Please, I didn’t come to argue.”

That’s how Geraldo Rivera started his segment on Fox News Friday morning as the conversation turned to Libya. But while he may not have come to argue, that’s exactly what happened. And it was one of the most heated arguments in recent memory on the news network.

In short, Geraldo continued to trumpet his argument from last week that the U.S. military could not have done anything to save those attacked in Libya.

After fill-in host Eric Bolling suggested how disgraceful it was that the government did “nothing” to help the eventual victims, Geraldo wasn’t having any of it.
It’s an “obscene lie,” he said emphatically.

“You are a politician looking to make a political point!” he added after Bolling challenged him, later repeating the point: “You are misleading the American people because you want to make a political point.”

Geraldo was visibly disturbed, raising his finger and voice and even shaking. He even lightly chastised the father of slain former SEAL Tyrone Woods for attacking the president over the debacle. He even added that what Woods’s father was insinuating — that Obama went off to Las Vegas instead of trying to protect his son — was a “a lie.”

While visibly angry at the administration detractors, Geraldo did say that there was room for criticism, mainly regarding why we had our ambassador in Libya if we couldn’t protect him. He also said it’s “legitimate” to investigate whether the government covered up the “genesis” of the attack, referring to the YouTube video the administration blamed.

Eventually host Steve Doocy had to calm him down, resting his hands on Geraldo’s back and leg to ease him.

“Geraldo, we get where you’re coming from.”

But that wasn’t all. Gretchen Carlson went to tease an upcoming segment on immigrants and college and that’s when Geraldo threw all caution to the wind: “Oh great. Now they’re going to go get lynched.”

Watch the fireworks below:

[Ryan Ruck]

Jerry Rivers is slowly becoming more and more unhinged.

[vector7]

Fox News: Benghazi Consulate Warned State Department 3 Hours Before Attack Militia Gathering Arms And Intel…



And yet they still claimed for days after the attack is was a spontaneous protest over the Mohammed film.
Via Hot Air:

Remember how the White House insisted for more than a week that there was “no evidence” that the sacking of the Benghazi consulate was anything more than a spontaneous demonstration over a two-month-old YouTube video that “spun out of control”? Fox News this morning reports that cables from the consulate itself made clear that they expected an attack from local militia groups in the hours before the terrorist attack that claimed the lives of four Americans, including Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens. They also told the State Department that they had reason to believe their local security was gathering intel for the attack.
Keep reading…

ZIP | November 2, 2012 12:35 pm

[American Patriot]

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2...ge-In-Benghazi

Report: CIA Far Outnumbered State Dept In Benghazi

---

Print Article Send a Tip


by AWR Hawkins 2 Nov 2012, 4:51 PM PDT post a comment
The great majority of U.S. personnel in Benghazi at the time of the attack were not tied to the State Dept. but to the CIA, according to a recent report.

In fact, it is reported that Benghazi was chiefly a CIA operations hub. Therefore, following the Sept 11 attack, of the thirty U.S. personnel evacuated, only seven were tied to the State Dept. -- those who rounded out the thirty were tied to the CIA.
This information sheds light on CIA Director David Petraeus' absence from ceremonies marking the return of the bodies of Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans killed in the Benghazi attacks. Those ceremonies were attended by the President, the Vice President, Secretaries of State and Defense, but no Petraeus.
It is now being reported that he was lying low to protect the integrity of undercover CIA operations (and operatives) in Libya.
In fact, U.S. officials are now saying that Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty, two former Navy SEALS killed in the Sept 11 attack, were not associated with the State Dept as originally reported, but with the CIA.
Amid the pressures being placed on the State Dept in the wake of the attack, some in Congress are now saying the CIA is using its cloak of secrecy to protect itself from criticism in Benghazi. Ultimately, however, the responsibility rests with Obama. This is his CIA, just as it is his State Dept.

[vector7]

Anti-Islam Filmmaker Gets Year in Prison for False ID

The White House is no longer blaming him and his inflammatory video for sparking an attack that killed the American ambassador to Libya. But in the eyes of the U.S. government, Mark Basseley Youssef is still a criminal — and a potentially dangerous one at that. And so today, after Youssef admitted to four counts of violating his probation, a federal judge sentenced the man behind the notorious anti-Islam movie “Innocence of Muslims” to a year in prison. The 55-year-old’s request to serve out his sentence in home confinement was denied by U.S. District Court Judge Christina Snyder; his contention that he was some sort of First Amendment martyr, brushed aside.

Youssef — then believed to be operating under the name “Sam Bacile” — became an international figure in September when his video became a flashpoint for anti-American protests throughout the Muslim world. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton blasted the movie, which depicts a child-molesting Prophet Muhammad, as “disgusting and reprehensible.” The American ambassador to the U.N. claimed that a protest against the movie spontaneously morphed into the complex attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya that left four Americans dead.

That claim was later walked back by the Obama administration, to great political effect. But by then, Youssef was behind bars — the latest in 21-year-old series of run-ins with the law.

In August of 1991, Youssef, who owns a gas station, was convicted on two counts of selling watered-down fuel. Six years later, he was arrested on charges related to the manufacture of PCP. In 2009, Youssef was arrested for using 14 different identities — including “Kritbag Difrat” and “P.J. Tobacco” – in a check-kiting scheme. Afterwards, Youssef turned informant against the supposed ringleader. In return, he received a relatively light penalty for participation in the scheme: a $794,700 fine, 21 months in federal custody, and an order to stop lying about who he was.

“The defendant shall not obtain or possess any driver’s license, Social Security number, birth certificate, passport or any other form of identification in any name, other than the defendant’s true legal name,” reads Youssef’s terms of probation (.pdf). “Nor shall the defendant use, for any purpose or in any manner, any name other than his/her true legal name or names without the prior written approval of the Probation Officer.”

What prosecutors didn’t realize — and what only came out after the brouhaha over “Innocence” — was that Youssef had violated those terms even before he signed his probation agreement. Youssef was tried, convicted, jailed, and operated as a federal informant while assuming the name “Nakoula Basseley Nakoula.” Up until a few months ago, he had a California driver’s license that listed him as Nakoula.

But that wasn’t his real name at all, at least not anymore. Back in 2002, he legally changed his named from Nakoula Basseley Nakoula to Mark Basseley Youssef. ”Nakoula is a girl’s name and it causes me troubles,” he claimed at the time.

Boy, did it ever. Prosecutors argued — and judges agreed — that using the Nakoula and Bacile monickers — were clear violations of the former fraudster’s probation. He was arrested, held without bail, and today sentenced to a year in prison with four additional years of supervised release.

“This is not a defendant that you want out there using multiple names,” said Assistant U.S. Atty. Robert Dugdale. ”This is a defendant who has engaged in a long pattern of deception… His dishonesty goes back years.”

And that includes how he went about making this movie. Actors in “Innocence” say they were duped into making anti-Islam agitprop, with the most inflammatory lines dubbed in after they shot their scenes. When the video went viral, Youssef, using the name Bacile and claiming to be Israeli, falsely claimed that 100 wealthy Jews had given $5 million to back the film. As the New York Times notes, Dugdale used these deceptions as part of his sentencing argument — even though none of the charges against Youssef related directly to the production of “Innocence.”

But Youssef’s defenders — and there are many — can’t shake the feeling that this is more about the movie’s controversial content than Youssef’s deceitful manner/a>. According to the anti-Islam advocate Robert Spencer, “He is a political prisoner.”

Youssef’s attorney, Steven Seiden, made a similar argument after Judge Snyder’s ruling today. ”In my opinion, the government used these proceedings to chill my client’s first amendment rights,” he told reporters. Then added that his client had a special message for them.

“The one thing he wanted me to tell all of you is President Obama may have gotten Osama bin Laden, but he didn’t kill the ideology,” Seiden said, according to the Associated Press.

Asked what that meant, Seiden said, “I didn’t ask him, and I don’t know.”

[American Patriot]

McCain is having a presser on Benghazi.... right now.

[American Patriot]

He's calling for an independent investigation and he's asking questions. He's not happy.

[Ryan Ruck]

"Look at me! Look at me! I'm still relevant!"


Oh and Lindsey Graham follows up, what a surprise...

I suppose at least someone is wanting to get answers. I just don't like these two blowdried windbags being the public face of the inquiry.

[American Patriot]

I don't either. But anyone might be better that nothing, don't you think?

I mean, seriously, if they don't do it, who will?

[American Patriot]

Well, there Kelly Ayotte....

[Ryan Ruck]

I don't either. But anyone might be better that nothing, don't you think?

I mean, seriously, if they don't do it, who will?

Allen West, the new Speaker of the House.

I don't think such an investigation is limited to the Senate after all.

[American Patriot]

I don't know if there is a "rule" about which house of Congress can create a "select committee" but if I'm not mistaken it is generally a Senate function.

Each state in the Union is responsible for controlling the Federal government, thus it falls to the Senate - I think by default. I might be wrong, but in the past there have been Senatorial committees to investigate things like Watergate and the Iran-Contra issues.... those weren't House functions.

[American Patriot]

Petraeus to testify at Benghazi hearing

Kevin Lamarque / Reuters

Ex-CIA Director David Petraeus speaks to members of a Senate Intelligence hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington on January 31, 2012.
By NBC News staff

Former CIA Director David Petraeus will testify Thursday about the attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi before the Senate Intelligence Committee, a veteran senator confirmed to NBC News Wednesday.

The Thursday hearing will be the first formal congressional inquiry into the September attack that killed U.S. Ambassador in Libya Chris Stevens, information management officer Sean Smith and security personnel Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty.

Petraeus, a decorated four-star general who received widespread praise for the surge strategy in Iraq, resigned as CIA director on Friday, citing an extramarital affair.

As FBI investigated Petraeus, he and Allen intervened in nasty custody battle
Advertise | AdChoices

Numerous federal government officials have told NBC News that the married general had a relationship with his biographer, Paula Broadwell, 40, who authored “All In,” a book about Petraeus’ education.

Republican lawmakers have criticized the administration’s evolving explanation of what triggered the Benghazi attack. Officials early on said it was a spontaneous reaction during a protest about an anti-Islamic film. Later, it was termed a planned terrorist attack.

Questions have also been raised about whether the consulate had adequate security and whether the State Department responded appropriately to requests for more protection.

Military analyst Col. Jack Jacobs (Ret.) said the sex scandal will affect the way Petraeus is questioned by Congress, because members were kept in the dark about the FBI inquiry that led to his resignation.

Defense official fires back, denies Afghanistan commander exchanged 'inappropriate' emails

“It will be interesting to see what tenor it takes and what the senators and congressmen, assuming he gets before both houses, have to say before talking to him. As you know, these hearings have a tendency to be less a question and answer period than it is an opportunity for the members to vent their spleen or talk about what they want to, so that part will be very, very interesting,” Jacobs said.

“In terms of extracting real information about what actually took place and what role the CIA had in what took place in Benghazi, I believe that investigation will determine that they had no role, that by the time the CIA could do anything, it was all over.”

[American Patriot]

Pentagon Alerted Within 50 Minutes of Benghazi Attack in Libya
David Lerman and Tony Capaccio, ©2012 Bloomberg News
Published 4:51 p.m., Tuesday, November 13, 2012
Tweet
Comments (0)
Larger | Smaller
Printable Version
Email This
Font


Nov. 9 (Bloomberg) -- Defense Secretary Leon Panetta was alerted about 50 minutes after the start of the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, and dispatched troops from Europe within hours, according to a timeline by the Defense Department.

The timeline released today responds to statements by some Republicans before the Nov. 6 election that President Barack Obama’s administration failed to respond to requests for military aid or for rescue efforts during the Sept. 11 attack that killed U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans.

While President Barack Obama ordered “all available” Pentagon assets to respond to the attacks, no armed planes were near Benghazi at the time, Panetta said today in a letter to members of Congress.

An unarmed surveillance drone was directed to the Benghazi compound 17 minutes after the attack began and arrived over the site about 70 minutes later, according to the timeline.

The attack began at 3:42 p.m. Washington time. At a meeting that evening that began at 6 p.m., Panetta authorized the deployment of a Marine Corps anti-terrorism teams to Benghazi and Tripoli from Rota, Spain as well as a Europe-based special operations team. He also ordered a U.S.-based special operations force to prepare to deploy to a staging base in southern Europe.

At 6:30 p.m. Washington time, a six-member security team from the U.S. embassy in Tripoli, the Libyan capital, departed for Benghazi and arrived about an hour later -- almost four hours after the attack began.

A second facility in Benghazi, known as a safe house, came under mortar and rocket fire at 11:15 p.m., the Pentagon said.

C-17 Sent

The U.S. Africa Command ordered a C-17 cargo plane in Germany to prepare to deploy to Libya to evacuate Americans about 50 minutes later.

The first wave of American personnel departed Benghazi for Tripoli at about 1:40 a.m. Washington time, with a second wave departing at about 4 a.m.

At 8:15 a.m., the C-17 departed Germany for Tripoli. It picked up American personnel and the remains of Stevens and three other Americans and left Tripoli for Germany at 1:17 p.m.

The first of the troops dispatched by Panetta the previous evening began arriving from just before 3 p.m. Washington time, long after the attack had ended. Most got no further than an intermediate staging area in southern Europe.

“Before they arrived in place, the attack in Benghazi had concluded,” Panetta said in his letter

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/business/bloom...#ixzz2CDXB9wf8

[American Patriot]

By

Margaret Brennan /
CBS News/ November 13, 2012, 5:00 PM
Congressional leaders view secure Benghazi documents

1 Comment
/
Shares /
Tweets /
Stumble /
Email
More +

WASHINGTONFor the first time since the deadly attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, congressional investigators will question high-level State Department, CIA and Pentagon officials this week regarding specific communication and intelligence about the security situation in Libya.

Telegrams, intelligence reports, and classified emails from top officials at the U.S. State Department are being made available to congressional investigators in secure rooms on Capitol Hill. Sources also tell CBS News that intelligence officials will show footage from an unmanned surveillance drone that was overhead during the assault. That disclosure is likely to come on Thursday during the classified hearing before the Senate Select Intelligence Committee.

Play Video
Benghazi timeline released

On Tuesday, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which has oversight of the State Department, was briefed by Under Secretary Patrick Kennedy and Assistant Secretary for Diplomatic Security Eric Boswell about the deadly assault on the U.S. Consulate. While both officials have previously spoken to lawmakers about the attack, this is the first time that lawmakers will be asking questions after viewing the internal communication between diplomats and security professional in Libya and in Washington. Mike Morrell, Acting Director of the CIA, was also on Capitol Hill and met in a secure room with Senate Intelligence Committee members senators Feinstein and Saxby Chambliss.

CIA denies it detained militants in Benghazi
Timeline: How Benghazi attack, probe unfolded
Military response to Benghazi attack questioned

State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland said that the documents being shared are "really specific to the requests as they come in." The State Department did screen these documents for sensitive information before choosing which items to share. Members are allowed to view the documents and take notes but cannot make copies or remove them from the secure location. The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee have all made document requests.

"We have told all of these requesting committees and their staff that they can see these documents as many times as they'd like to see them, for as long as they'd like to see them," Nuland said.

Nuland refuted reports that the State Department has been withholding information or limiting the viewing time.

Play Video
Sec. Clinton promises open investigation on Benghazi attack

"We've really done our utmost under the Secretary's instructions to be fully compliant, transparent, and open with the Congress," she said.

The most substantive session this week is likely to happen before the Senate Select Intelligence Committee. The Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, Acting CIA Director Michael Morrell, FBI Deputy Director Sean Joyce, Undersecretary of State for Management Pat Kennedy, and National Counterterrorism Center Director Matthew Olsen will all testify. The involvement of the FBI in the briefing may allow for disclosure regarding the ongoing investigation into who carried out the attack on the U.S. mission which killed four Americans. The agency has kept information private citing that there is an ongoing probe into the criminal matter.

It is unclear whether State Department and intelligence officials will share additional information behind closed doors. On Tuesday, State Department spokesman Mark Toner said that he did not know the content of the briefing or the materials presented by the agency. The briefings are classified at the request of Capitol Hill. He also said that he did not know whether Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will appear on the Hill at the end of the month following a request from the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

The public will largely learn the details of the assault through media accounts and original reporting. The White House and State Department say that the Accountability Review Board, the Department's own Congressionally-mandated probe, will provide a comprehensive investigation of the attack but it is not clear whether all of the probe will be made public. A source close to that investigation tells CBS News that the report could come as soon as December but that more time may be requested if needed.

That probe is primarily focused on decision-making at the State Department, not the White House. A source close to the investigation tells CBS News that the ARB members have not reviewed footage from the two U.S. drones which were overhead during the assault, but they have reviewed some footage from the more than 10 security cameras taken from inside the Benghazi compound. CBS News has learned that the footage was first viewed by State Department security professionals at the beginning of October around the same time that the ARB probe began. The U.S. government did not gain possession of the video until weeks after the attack. The FBI investigation is ongoing.

Under Secretary Patrick Kennedy and Eric Boswell will present to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Tuesday and the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee on Wednesday. Kennedy will also testify in a closed hearing before the House Permanent Select Intelligence Committee on Thursday and later that day before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. He will brief the Chairmen and ranking members from the House at the end of the week.